How Conservative Is CPAC?

And what does the “rise of the libertarian strand of Republicanism” mean for the GOP?

On the surface, the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference wasn’t much different from most years. There were the usual bizarre theatrics, ritual denunciations of Barack Obama, and the early cattle call of possible Republican candidates for the next presidential election.

But the CPAC straw poll found a group of young conference-goers who were markedly more libertarian and noninterventionist than their elders. The survey found that 77 percent believed it was most important to secure individual freedom “by reducing the size and scope of government” while just 15 percent said their main goal was promoting traditional values.

A plurality of 50 percent said it was time for U.S. allies in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere to bear the costs of their own national defense, while just 34 percent said “the world’s only superpower” should be on the hook.

Convening in the wake of Rand Paul’s anti-drone filibuster, 86 percent opposed the government using drones to kill U.S. citizens. Fully 70 percent were against using drones even to spy on citizens.

Maybe Mike Huckabee had a point when he said that CPAC was becoming more libertarian than conventionally conservative.

The only exception was sequestration, where 68 percent of those who voted in the straw poll wanted to allocate the spending cuts differently than the current law. Respondents weren’t invited to elaborate on their reasoning, but the implication was that the across-the-board cuts fell too heavily on defense.

Some might respond that since Rand Paul won CPAC’s presidential vote, these results must reflect his youthful supporters stuffing the ballot box—an oversampling of “libertarian kids,” as some might put it.

But Paul edged out Marco Rubio by just 25 percent to 23 percent. The Kentucky senator’s supporters were only a fourth of those who voted. Skepticism about government at home and abroad—even in areas with which conservatives have traditionally been comfortable—prevailed by a much wider margin.

The voters were indeed young, however: 52 percent of those who cast straw poll ballots were between the ages of 18 and 25. Another 20 percent were aged 26 to 40. Only 5 percent were over the age of 65.

Most of the reactions tend to suggest that this new libertarian tilt is bad news for social conservatism. The columnist George Will described “a sense of live and let live with subjects such as decriminalization of certain drugs and gay marriage.”

Yet as soon as Paul left CPAC, he unveiled a sweeping pro-life bill that eschewed his father’s federalist approach to the issue. (Though the distinction can be overstated: Ron Paul was also a pro-lifer who sometimes reluctantly voted for federal legislation aimed at curbing abortion.)

So far the first part of Will’s take on libertarian Republicanism has held up better, the view that it might have “an effect on foreign policy, that is a pullback from nation building and other kind of ambitions abroad that they never countenance from government at home.” Its immediate targets have been presidential war powers, extrajudicial killings, and the surveillance programs that were the hallmark of George W. Bush’s conception of the war on terror.

To be sure, these gains are fragile. The same CPAC attendees who “Stand with Rand” and chant “Don’t drone me, bro” often have no problem with Rubio, whose foreign-policy inclinations are markedly different, and give relatively high approval ratings to John Boehner’s House.

It’s easy to see how the White House shifting from an insufficiently civil libertarian Democrat to a generically hawkish Republican could change this dynamic. A few election losses could badly deplete the ranks of libertarian-leaning political leaders.

But the liberty movement is already more established—and on questions of war and peace, more ideological—than the Buchananites who compelled Bush to pretend he favored a humble foreign policy. Its reach can increasingly be felt in more established free-market groups that have previously preferred to get involved in Republican primaries when tax hikes or government bailouts were involved.

This renewed era of big government has added $6 trillion to the national debt. Coincidentally, that’s also the latest cost estimate for the Iraq War. The emergence of Republicans serious about big government at home and in favor of a less expensive foreign policy abroad couldn’t have come at a better time.

Many Republicans will nevertheless only be convinced by one tagline: Don’t primary me, bro.

MORE IN POLITICS

Hide 22 comments

22 Responses to How Conservative Is CPAC?

“A plurality of 50 percent said it was time for U.S. allies in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere to bear the costs of their own national defense…”

If U.S. allies bear the costs of their own “defense,” their military stances will then inevitably have a decidedly less American tilt.

He who pays the piper, calls the tune – which is why U.S. funding is necessary to make sure American interests – that is to say, those of financial elites who have the largest influence on foreign policy – are served.

“Convening in the wake of Rand Paul’s anti-drone filibuster, 86 percent opposed the government using drones to kill U.S. citizens. Fully 70 percent were against using drones even to spy on citizens.”

The only reason CPAC attendees oppose these policies it that they will be carried out for the next four years by a Kenyan anti-colonial Marxist. As soon as one of their tribe is back in power, they’ll be cheering on drone strikes with jingoistic Toby Keith songs playing in the background.

The alliance between fiscal and social conservatives is coming to an end. The tea party strand of the Republican party really do not have much in common with the religious right. In truth, they are frequently at odds. I suspect that the social conservatives are going to be squeezed out of the party. They will be allowed to remain, of course, but they will find that they have very little voice. If the GOP can dump the social conservatives they have a chance of remaining relevent.

It is unlikely that an even more libertarian attitude toward government will help the Republican party in the Northern swing states. And a rapidly Hispanicizing West won’t be in favor of limited government either, if only because Latinos are heavy users of government subsidies. This later point seems to be lost on both small and large-L libertarians. It may indeed be that the GOP is through, but it won’t be because of its increasingly marginalized social conservatives.

M_Young – You make some sound comments, other than your last sentence. It is, indeed, the social conservatives that are giving the Republicans a bad name. Regardless of policitical affiliation, I think most people are for allowing people to live their own lives as they see Fit. Social conservatives may not like that, but they need to learn that is a fact and simply move on.

the Buchananites who compelled Bush to pretend he favored a humble foreign policy

I don’t accept that. I think Bush was speaking his heart. 9/11 threw him for a loop and he started taking bad advice from people who were dissembling their real agenda. But in the case of GWB himself it was tragic error, not deception.

Democrats watch with glee as the GOP point their fingers at each other. What do they represent? They represent nothing, clearly defined by the legislation they have written to be instituted contrasted by the legislation they sign for purely political reasons to appease their local gerry mandered precincts and get elected to office. Pathetic and pitiful, since we need conservative input in government and end up with clowns posting urine. Sarah Palin a GOP spokesperson? I smell burnt toast.

Does anyone really think CPAC is reliable indicator of internal dynamics of the party? Was it not Ron Paul (may Von Mises smile upon him) who “clearly” blew out all the competition in previous CPAC polls? How did he faire in the primaries? Oh yeah he didn’t close to winning – but I bet you can find a bunch of stories on this website and others back then talking about how Ron Paul’s “victories” were clear indications of libertarianism’s ascendance (not the fact that a bunch of young white libertarian college kids snuck in without paying.) Even now little Rand’s margin of victory was nowhere near as convincing as his fathers.

Really libertarianism’s so-called “rise” in the Republican Party is like buying stock in newspaper companies or maybe even buying stock in movie rental stores. If the Republicans want to stay relevant they’ll have to adopt a much more communitarian approach, while jettisoning the stupid rhetoric of the religious right. But we all know that abortion and marriage were never top Republican priorities anyway.

I wouldn’t be so sure of that. Just last cycle even super liberal (and heavily) Hispanic California voted down gay marriage. Also don’t pin your hopes on drug legalization. A future charismatic Democrat could easy out flank libertarians on that front which would then slash about 95% of the whole “youth love libertarianism” theme.

Fran, any government tilts away from the USA, or at least “less in our direction,” beccause we stop doing that government’s job of defending their own country, is not a true friend or ally anyway.

Also, ask yourself, where else can some of these countries go but alliance and friendship with the USA? Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines, for example, know quite well what will eventually happen to them, their freedom, their language, and their culture in the face of an increasingly powerful and belligerent China, if they do not maintain close alliance with the USA.

Having said that, it’s high time for the US government to end all explicit or implicit promises that it will go to war with China to protect any of those nations. Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea are well able to spend more on their own defense and field much larger air forces and navies, and they had better get to it and stop relying on our broke, overextended asses to do it for them.

The upcoming Rubio/Paul tussle should be fascinating to watch. My initial impression of Rubio is that he is largely an empty suit who goes around spouting platitudes and channeling Reagan. However, he is the mainstream guy and watch for the GOP establishment (paging Karl Rove) to rally round him, unless Jeb Bush is able to accomplish the impossible by redeeming the trashed Bush name in under 8 years. Guys like Santorum are toast.
This leave Rand, who is much more of a mainstream conservative than his father (don’t look for an ‘end the fed’ campaign or return to the gold standard from him). However, in my opinion, the GOP head honchos would rather see Hillary win in 2016 than allow Rand to get the GOP nomination.

Aren’t conservatives supposed to be about rolling back politics so we have room to do, and think about, other things for a change? If so, how is it they’re already launching the 2016 presidential campaign? And as important as it is to get ahold of the fedgov, where were the admonitions to get involved in, State and local government?

Ron Paul got shafted in the primaries and caucuses. Too many stories of vote fraud , delegate lockouts, etc., to recount.
He was also the beneficiary of a near-complete media blackout just as he began to see some success.

” young white libertarian college kids” —

nice stereotype, except: I am black, and at the one RP rally I attended, I happened to run into a black female friend who I had no idea would be there.

Also present in the crowd, I discovered later, was another friend — a black man.

The three other friends I arrived with were white (a Jew, a Catholic, and an agnostic; I’m Baptist). However, neither myself nor any of these five friends were college kids — we’re GenXers, ranging from 30s to 50s. Most of us are creatives of some kind.

I don’t make it a point to study these things but just randomly the other day, I learned that Ashley Ryan, the pro-RP Repub committeewoman from Maine, is a black woman — part of the legitimate delegation that was screwed over by the RNC machine. (The ME governor actually refused to attend the RNC over this issue.)

But we all know that abortion and marriage were never top Republican priorities anyway.

Exactly: placing faith in the GOP and Washington polytricks was the pro-life movement’s biggest mistake. Much more ground could have been gained through economic, social and spiritual activism. I believe in standing on principle, but I also believe in choosing your battles.

Also don’t pin your hopes on drug legalization. A future charismatic Democrat could easy out flank libertarians on that front, which would then slash about 95% of the whole “youth love libertarianism” theme.

Another facile stereotype. Most of the libertarians I know are as interested in things like stopping the worldwide wars and ending the Fed as in legalizing drugs — if not more so. Although ending Prohibitio,n too, is part of the package of being a free and reponsible people.

A lot of libertarians — such as myself– are tired, too, of faith and morality being appropriated as marketing gimmicks by politicians often lacking in either. We’re starting to figure out that we don’t need the state dressing up as the church. We don’t need the state to either approve or disapprove, privilege or punish, our relationships and victimless acts — least of all, from on high in the District of Crooks.

“Ron Paul got shafted in the primaries and caucuses. Too many stories of vote fraud , delegate lockouts, etc., to recount.
He was also the beneficiary of a near-complete media blackout just as he began to see some success.”

There are two places that the “libertarian republicans” can go if the neo-cons that run the republican establishment refuse to give up their place at the head of the table. They can work with the Tea Party and create a new political party or they can join the Libertarian Party. Since Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson got more than a million votes the last election more and more republicans are starting to figure out that if the republican party stays on the course that it is on on that it won’t be long at all before it becomes extinct, I’m betting on the latter.

Gary Johnson may have gotten more than a million votes but Romney got more than 59 million. I believe you will need quite a few more republicans to move before the Libertarian party matters in the way you are hoping.

The libertarian Republicans are going to have a tough time overcoming the corporatist bent of their party. The GOP as it currently exists is essentially an advocacy organization for the Kochs, Goldman Sachs, Walmart, and the other entrenched economic interests. And that element has all the money and much of Congress in their back pocket. Rand Paul is going to enjoy about as much success on the right as Dennis Kucinich has on the left. Big Money runs the game, and is very good at marginalizing anyone who doesn’t play by their rules.

In the American conservative circles it seems there are way too many ‘totem poles’ now. So you do not have to be necessarily informed and thoughtful to be conservative. It is enough to pay lip service or cling on to one or some of the ‘totem poles’ because of some narrow self-interest.

It seems it is not necessary for such people to carry a conviction as to ‘what needs to be conserved’ – the very basis for conservatism! And that change (sometimes cloaked as ‘progress’) is not always for the better, and that we all should watch our own imperfect selves (and hence imperfect ideas and societal imperfections). Fake piety and crass identity politics is mistaken for religiosity.

I sympathize to some degree with the ideals of libertarianism, but I do not think that there has ever been a successful truly “libertarian” society and cannot be at mankind’s current stage of development.

I am not sure that a libertarian society can realistically have the sort of values that will keep the society grounded in reality and healthy.

Many libertarians seem to believe that, for example, society should let any number or types of persons be married to any other number or types of persons. This is multiple partner marriage, which is now being adjudicated by courts and will someday succeed if we allow same sex marriage because they are all based on the same principle: “do whatever you want if you love someone else and want equal rights.”

Young libertarians seem to think that “anything goes” is a great ideal.
Sorry, but a stable society cannot be built on such fantasies. “Anything goes” is a prescription for the death of heterosexual familes, demographic and cultural disintegration, and the final death of the society itself, helped along by “anything goes” immigration.

“Man does not live by bread alone,” though libertarians seem to think he does. Low taxes do no good if society is rotting from the inside.

Allowing people to live their lives as they see fit is fine, until they have illegitimate kids, become pedophiles, and the STD rate goes sky high then it affects everyone at some point. Why should everyone go down the drain because others live reckless lives? Democracy was the biggest lie, the biggest mistake the people ever bought. The whole thing is a divide and conquer strategy, where the people bicker amongst themselves over trivial stuff, while the elite solidify their power over us. Democracy is simply mob rule and the general IQ of a large mob is usually very small. When the social conservatives lose their voice completely, not only is this country finished, but so is the world. Why? Because this nation is hell bent on making damn sure the rest of the world will have no moral code either. We will have a world that is an amoral abyss, with nothing more than cheap commercialism ruling our lives. No tradition, no culture! We will just be soulless drones that live to work and nothing more. If the GOP loses its social conservative base or just throws them overboard they are toast.

Libertarians will have more press and garner more interest as the moral code that Christianity upheld is being ignored more and more with each passing year. Social conservatism is steadily losing ground, especially with gay marriage. THe main reason is that the churches in America do not preach fire and brimstone anymore, but Dr. Phil lovey dovey crap. People are fed that they are saved whilst they are cheating on their spouses, stealing, etc. Anything is OK with Jesus. No need to repent, just believe. The thing is this won’t be so bad, but our nation is owned and controlled by corporatists that seek profit in anything. Prisons are going private now, and if the govt goes belly up, all of them will be private ventures. Only way to increase profits is to increase incarceration, so you can forget legalizing mary jane anytime soon. Libertarians are libertarians until they get into the real world. These kids will have to soon pay up the wazoo in college loans. They won’t be in a position to be able to pay, etc without govt help or forgiveness.